Evidence, please. I'm sure one has to exist in recent history, but I know of no stadium (constructed for an existing team - the K.C. basketball arena fiasco doesn't qualify) that was a net loss for the municipality that helped fund it.

Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 4:45:00 PM (view original):I'd be interested to see the last city that ultimately lost money building an arena for an existing team.

Miami?

Of course, the verdict isn't in but it seems to be heading in that direction.

Yes, that financing/stadium contract is a clusterf*ck of epic proportions. Whoever was negotiating on behalf of the city/county should be dragged into the street and shot. Still though, the bonds are paid via "tourist taxes" speciifically increased for this purpose and, even though the Marlins get the vast majority of gate AND parking (again, horribly inept negotiating by the city/county), eventually it will become a wash at worse. Property taxes, some revenue from parking, tax revenue associated with the increased traffic and jobs the stadium provides, etc. It's just going to take much longer there than in most places because the politicans were dumbasses.

Posted by examinerebb on 7/26/2013 6:46:00 PM (view original):Evidence, please. I'm sure one has to exist in recent history, but I know of no stadium (constructed for an existing team - the K.C. basketball arena fiasco doesn't qualify) that was a net loss for the municipality that helped fund it.

The Glendale issue has been well publicized and their shortfall is due to a $30 million (or thereabouts) stipend they pay to the NHL and/or the team owners to play in Glendale. I've never been to Glendale, but it's also my understanding that it's a 30 minute drive from the closest population hub in Arizona. That's ****-poor planning.

You don't find it odd that you argue against publicly funded stadiums, after arguing that any government spending, even if wasteful, is good economic stimulus?

Posted by examinerebb on 7/28/2013 11:23:00 AM (view original):The Glendale issue has been well publicized and their shortfall is due to a $30 million (or thereabouts) stipend they pay to the NHL and/or the team owners to play in Glendale. I've never been to Glendale, but it's also my understanding that it's a 30 minute drive from the closest population hub in Arizona. That's ****-poor planning.

You don't find it odd that you argue against publicly funded stadiums, after arguing that any government spending, even if wasteful, is good economic stimulus?

Municipal governments and the federal government are not the same. The Feds get to play by different rules.